Red announces Scarlet to ship in 2011

even if you don't buy red you should thank them for driving down competitor prices

(there's too much hate in a lot of these posts)
 
Guys, for God's sake, there are other applications for cameras besides those that demand shallow DOF. It is not appropriate for every kind of work.
 
Josh Bass said:
Guys, for God's sake, there are other applications for cameras besides those that demand shallow DOF. It is not appropriate for every kind of work.
Click to expand...

So very true. I think RED pretty much has the large sensor thing figured out. There is a HUGE market for 2/3 chip cameras. For example; no journalist or event camera person would want the trouble of shallow DOF.
 
Josh Bass said:
Guys, for God's sake, there are other applications for cameras besides those that demand shallow DOF. It is not appropriate for every kind of work.
Click to expand...

Absolutely.

event shooting
Green screen
3D
Architectural walk throughs
news
documentaries
run and gun


I find it's hard to explain this to "filmmakers" who shoot test videos out of their parents basement.:cheesy:
 
But...the name of the company is RED Digital Cinema, not RED Electronic News Gathering Company. 2/3 had a position in Cinema with Sony when that was the only sensor size developed for 24p (F900), but now? You can make a large sensor cinema camera have a deep DOF, you can't make a 2/3 have a shallow DOF. I agree that 2/3 has a place- a huge place in todays marketplace- but that format is already covered well by Sony Canon and Panasonic. To me, there is little market sense for RED to go into that market.
 
_JD_ said:
But...the name of the company is RED Digital Cinema, not RED Electronic News Gathering Company. 2/3 had a position in Cinema with Sony when that was the only sensor size developed for 24p (F900), but now? You can make a large sensor cinema camera have a deep DOF, you can't make a 2/3 have a shallow DOF. I agree that 2/3 has a place- a huge place in todays marketplace- but that format is already covered well by Sony Canon and Panasonic. To me, there is little market sense for RED to go into that market.
Click to expand...

Driving it home _JD_
 
While being at times not happily amused by Red's publicity history statements the last few years , because I would have bought the 3k/for/3k scarlet two years ago, I still would love to see the fixed scarlet camera reality show , so I'll patiently wait for November . And the same sentiment goes for canon ! Whatever they do , they'll do. And the sensor size issue ....hummm, I still find uses for my z1 !
 
Id love to see a 4k 2/3" sensor camera. Imagine a Varicam that does 4k for possibly 1/2 the price and power consumption. Now if they can only overcome the CMOS issues....great stuff.
 
2/3 inch has a place in cinema. RED has recognized that a number of times. Look at all the great movies shot on 16mm - not out of budgetary reasons, but for the choice of that format.
 
Gentlemen, if I recall, wasn't it Scarlett ALWAYS supposed to have been 2/3? As in, when it was first announced 27 years ago that this camera was first coming out? That's what I remember. But it's been generally agreed that it won't be anywhere near the $3K price point originally promised, right?
 
^ Yep, scarlet was always suppose to be 2/3. My guess is $7k for the body and lens alone.

It's the S35 version of the Scarlet with removable lenses has been dropped and later this year will end up coming out of the closet as the Epic-S-Whatever after RED has delivered all the EPIC stages and there is room on the production line for the scaled back Epic-X.

By the way, I myself would not chose 2/3 to shoot a film but many many good films were shot on 16mm. Look at "The Devils Rejects" for example by Rob Zombie. Excellent excellent film.

Guys? ( echo,, , echo... echo.... )
 
That was shot on so many formats who even knows what parts were shot with what... not the greatest example:

Camera
Arriflex 16 SR3, Zeiss Ultra 16 Lenses
Arriflex 416, Zeiss Ultra 16 Lenses
Canon EOS 5D Mark II, Canon L-Series Lenses
Canon EOS 7D, Canon L-Series Lenses

I think it was all 7D and they lied. lol
 
the most famous contemporary example was Leaving Las Vegas. Nothing wrong with 2/3's or s16 . Just start shipping , and then lets see a mkII !
 
I don't work with full size cameras myself, but it seems like it's the best of all worlds. . .still shallow, but not retarded shallow. Seriously. . .have you ever used a DOF calculator and run some 5D scenarios through it? Many times you come up with having 3" of focus. At f5.6.
 
Michael Olsen said:
2/3 inch has a place in cinema. RED has recognized that a number of times. Look at all the great movies shot on 16mm - not out of budgetary reasons, but for the choice of that format.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm probably going to get flamed for this but here goes. To a degree its possible to get 35mm to look like 16mm, but much more difficult to get 16mm to look like 35mm. The same would be true for digital; easier to get S35 to look like 2/3, more difficult to get 2/3 to like like S35.

With film most people would have chosen to shoot 16mm because of budgetary reasons, portability, ease of use etc. These are not factors with digital.

I know there would be some other factors involved (such as that look), but the 16mm look became in vogue because it came to represent guerrilla style shooting, documentary style footage in a film etc. But this can be achieved in post if you shoot it with this in consideration.
 
starcentral said:
That was shot on so many formats who even knows what parts were shot with what... not the greatest example:

Camera
Arriflex 16 SR3, Zeiss Ultra 16 Lenses
Arriflex 416, Zeiss Ultra 16 Lenses
Canon EOS 5D Mark II, Canon L-Series Lenses
Canon EOS 7D, Canon L-Series Lenses

I think it was all 7D and they lied. lol
Click to expand...

All of it was shot on 16mm except for the subway scenes (they didn't have a permit so they went guerilla with a DSLR).

If you want some other examples of stuff shot on digital 2/3" there's Benjamin Button, Avatar, Zodiac and Slumdog Millionaire...that's just off the top of my head.
 
Gabrobot said:
All of it was shot on 16mm except for the subway scenes (they didn't have a permit so they went guerilla with a DSLR).

If you want some other examples of stuff shot on digital 2/3" there's Benjamin Button, Avatar, Zodiac and Slumdog Millionaire...that's just off the top of my head.
Click to expand...

That's what I thought! Anyway, you can pretty much spot the 16mm feel...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top